(17-06-2014 05:18 AM)Luminon Wrote: OK, please refresh the page, read the updated post and tell me what do you think.

I think you've made several assertions without proving that they are objectively true, which was the major point of my post. As usual, people like you (religious people) ignore the forest for the trees.

(17-06-2014 05:18 AM)Luminon Wrote: I have a couple dozen pages of this stuff (not in English), mostly more evidence and parallels to physical reality, but that is the essence.

I'd ask what language it's in, but the fact that you say "physical reality" tells me it's going to be bullshit.

(17-06-2014 05:18 AM)Luminon Wrote: By trans-atheistic logical skills I mean that I am pissed at people who debunk Church nonsense, but swallow the same bullshit arguments when their government says them without the god part.

Oh boy... Conspiracy theorist. Because you guys are 100% rational. Tell me, if "the government" doesn't let any information escape... how do you guys figure out "the truth"? And how come of the thousands upon thousands of- you know what, just read this: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory

(17-06-2014 05:18 AM)Luminon Wrote: Or parents.

How were you able to separate "the truth" your parents told you from "the lies", if all you had was the information they gave you? Do you have supernatural powers? What number am I thinking of?

(17-06-2014 05:18 AM)Luminon Wrote: The bullshit runs deep and losing faith is just scratching the surface. All that it means to de-convert nowadays is that bullshit only needs to be secular to pass under people's radar.

Really? Did you hear about the "ocean" found in Earth's mantle? It seemed purely secular. You know what my reaction was when I first read it? I said to myself: "bull-fucking-shit".
Don't project your insecurities (or whatever you're projecting) onto us.

(17-06-2014 05:18 AM)Luminon Wrote: Hey, I may be narcissistic, but
a) I do therapy

At least there's that.

(17-06-2014 05:18 AM)Luminon Wrote: b) My definition is just generalized definition of other people's definitions of good, which means it includes them all. The fun part is, I arrived at it independently, which makes me proud.

Incredible. So you were raised without a sense of morality, without even hearing the terms "good" and "evil", yet you arrived at a definition that just happened to be a generalized version of other people's definitions of "good"? You must have supernatural powers! Seriously, what number am I thinking of?

(17-06-2014 05:18 AM)Luminon Wrote: c) It is supposed to provoke you into curiosity and desire to prove me wrong.

Attention-whoring because your position is indefensible and stupid, and you know it. Gotcha. At least you admit it.

(17-06-2014 05:18 AM)Luminon Wrote: I want them to love goodness and hate evil, both with passion and reason combined.

Does "hating evil" include hating "evil people/beings"? If so, we're gonna have a problem. I don't hate (by my definition of the term) any living things. Now I'll wait for you to confirm Godwin's law.

(17-06-2014 05:18 AM)Luminon Wrote: That kind of passion tends to awaken once we really see there are sharp tools to cut through bullshit. I try to provide people the sharp tools, so they can start cutting.

It would help if you could, you know, make a rational argument rather than a bullshit-based one.

The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?

(17-06-2014 04:51 AM)Luminon Wrote: ...
Variability is maximal in a certain kind of order, which is a cybernetic hierarchical arrangement, the arrangement from the greatest complexity to the lowest.
...

"While religions tell us next to nothing useful or true about the universe, they do tell us an enormous amount - perhaps an embarrassing amount - about ourselves, about what we value, fear and lust after." Iain M Banks

(17-06-2014 04:51 AM)Luminon Wrote: OK. So what would you do if I provided you an objective definition of good and evil?

I'd ask you to prove that it's objective and not subjective.

(17-06-2014 04:51 AM)Luminon Wrote: Is caution about definitions the last thing stopping you from spreading and teaching the message of good and fighting evil?

No. It's stopping me from conceptualizing the world in overly simplistic ways akin to the cartoons my daughter watches. I still think there are things we should strive to achieve and others to avoid. I just don't run around with a bucket of white paint, a bucket of black paint, and a brush to try and make my world more comfortable or easier to understand.

So, I tend to evaluate things more based on concepts like harm, honesty, greed, charity, and selfishness. Sure, some of those labels might look more white or more black than others, but I'm not going to waste my time conceptualizing my actions with a man-made construct based on stories of an invisible cosmic battle just to make things simple or convenient.

(17-06-2014 04:51 AM)Luminon Wrote: OK. So what would you do if I provided you an objective definition of good and evil?

I'd ask you to prove that it's objective and not subjective.

(17-06-2014 04:51 AM)Luminon Wrote: Is caution about definitions the last thing stopping you from spreading and teaching the message of good and fighting evil?

No. It's stopping me from conceptualizing the world in overly simplistic ways akin to the cartoons my daughter watches. I still think there are things we should strive to achieve and others to avoid. I just don't run around with a bucket of white paint, a bucket of black paint, and a brush to try and make my world more comfortable or easier to understand.

So, I tend to evaluate things more based on concepts like harm, honesty, greed, charity, and selfishness. Sure, some of those labels might look more white or more black than others, but I'm not going to waste my time conceptualizing my actions with a man-made construct based on stories of an invisible cosmic battle just to make things simple or convenient.